This is all really subjective. I cannot give a concrete examples, but vets have changed their stance/approach from time to time and made other adjustments suggested by the hitting staff that seemed to have worked/not worked. But again, it's tough for me to measure from watching on the TV/reading the papers because I'm sure from day-to-day he's working with players, watching film, viewing mechanics, etc., far more than I get to see, and for me, I honestly cannot measure the results (I make the assumption it's a full-time job). Pretty much like Girardi as coach. I tend to not be a fan. Never was. Some talk about coach of the year. The reason they say that is optics - they're floundering in a playoff race despite having $100MM+ of their payroll sit out the season, or whatever the number may be. Now he's more in-line with what the average coach has to work, but in YankeesLand it stands out more. So, was it him he made the pitching work in order for the Yankees to be somewhere in the hunt in August? How much credit goes to the player and the staff who drafted/traded for these pitchers? Evaluating coaches is a tough thing to do. But at the end of the season when you spend $200MM+ a few years in a row and the product is, meh, someone needs to shoulder blame, be it coach or GM or owner.